The Definition of Procreative

Here is another post that I wanted to save. Again, it says what I want to say. The indented quote is from someone else. The rest is my response.

We are using science to determine if we are fertile and having sex only when we are not. That, in and of itself, is messing with the way God meant it to be, according to what Catholics say about contraception. We are separating the procreative and the unitive properties of sex.

Please allow me to give a different perspective than the ones already presented here. I speak with the voice of those suffering from infertility.

Let me begin by asking you a question. Would you be willing to look an infertile couple in the eye and say, "You are not being procreative. You are separating the procreative from the unitive?" I would hope not. I would hope that you have more sense than to tell a couple who desperately wants a child that they are not being procreative.

You see objectively, that is what they are doing, by your definition. According to what you have defined as "procreation," they have used science to determine that their act is not going to result in a conception, yet they are still having sex. If your definition of procreation is accurate, then they are doing the same thing as an NFP couple who is making exclusive use of the infertile phase. And by that further logic, you cannot see a difference between what an NFP couple does and what a contracepting couple does. So if I take those points to their logical conconclusion, then the infertile couple is contracepting. Because we know that if A=B, and B=C, then A=C. Correct?

But I would guess then that your answer would be, "No the infertile couple wants to have a baby." True. But that is intent, not means. So that merely changes the why they are having sex, not the when and how. What we are discussing is the objective means of having infertile sex.

But what if instead the definition of procreation is not just a reproductive act? What if being procreative is instead a measurable, act that is defined, (as it is correctly listed in your second post) as an act ordered towards life? Wouldn't that change the above illogical conclusion that an infertile couple is doing basically the same act as a contracepting couple? Wouldn't that say, that no, a contracepting couple has done an act of some kind, deliberately, to disorder the act away from life?

Having suffered through both previous infertility and now having to limit the size of my family through the use of the infertile phases, I can really see both sides of the coin. My health is so bad that there are days that I cannot get out of bed to tend my two children. I have to have people come over and help. I hate that. I would love to be healthy. I desperately wanted to have another child, but it looks like God has a different plan for us. I want more children. Right now. My intent is the desire for children, yet we only make use of the infertile phase. Are you willing to tell me that I have separated the procreative from the unitive?

If you are really interested in the topic I have a list of sources as long as my husband's arm that I can give you. (He's six feet tall. Long wing-span.) Contraception is most certainly discussed, by name, in Scripture. Many, many of the early Church Fathers wrote on the intrinsic evil of contraception. I am more than happy to discuss with you the massive differences between natural infertility and intentional sterility.

Contraception was the topic that brought me fully back home to living a devout Catholic life. My blog is entitled, "Confessions of a Former Contracepter."